[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Allahabad High Court
Bhupendra vs State Of U.P. on 2 February, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:22745
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2393 of 2026
Bhupendra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Amit Daga, Tarun Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Tarun Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 95 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Uldan, District Jhansi during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within four months of her marriage in her matrimonial home under abnormal circumstances and there is also allegation of torture with regard to demand of dowry but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false.
4. He further submits, actually deceased very often used to make conversation on mobile phone and therefore applicant and his family members always insisted her to take interest in doing work of matrimonial home but she was addicted of mobile phone and only due to this reason on 05.06.2025 serious altercation took place between applicant and his family members with the deceased and thereafter she committed suicide by hanging. He further submits, post mortem report also suggests that deceased died due to hanging.
5. He further submits, on the date of incident the younger sister of the deceased was also present in the matrimonial home of the deceased and the fact that dispute of deceased arose between applicant and his family members is also evident from her statement which has been annexed at page-60 of the paper-book and from its perusal it could not be reflected that dispute arose due to demand of dowry, therefore it appears, it is not a case of dowry death.
6. He further submits, immediately after the unfortunate incident father of the applicant namely Manchandra has given information to the police and on his information inquest was conducted and in the inquest brother of the deceased was one of the inquest witness and at the time of inquest he did not raise any objection and after the inquest FIR of the present case was lodged and this fact suggests that subsequently informant cooked up a false story and lodged FIR of the present case.
7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 09.06.2025 i.e. for last more than seven months.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
10. However, applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within four months of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of torture in connection to demand of motorcycle but considering the post mortem report of the deceased prima facie it appears to be a case of suicidal death and reason of suicide disclosed by the applicant in the instant bail application cannot be ruled out at this stage specially considering the statement of the sister of the deceased recorded during investigation as from her statement it could not be reflected that dispute arose between deceased, applicant and his family members with regard to demand of dowry.
11. Further, from the inquest report it reflects, it was conducted on the information given by father of the applicant and even brother of the deceased was one of the inquest witness and thereafter FIR of the present case was lodged.
12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 09.06.2025 i.e. for last more than seven months.
13. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive purpose.
14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
16. Let the applicant - Bhupendra be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
February 2, 2026
AK Pandey
